An Investigation of Literacy Practices in High School Science Classrooms

References

• Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Exploring the foundations of explicit instruction. In K. R. Harris & S. Graham (Eds.), Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching (pp. 1–22). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• August, D., Carlo, M., Dressler, C., & Snow, C. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 50–57. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2005.00120.x
   Google Scholar
• Bakken, J. P., & Whedon, C. K. (2002). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension. Intervention in School and Clinic, 37, 229–233. doi:10.1177/105345120203700406
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baumann, J. F., Edwards, E. C., Boland, E. M., Olejnik, S., & Kame’enui, E. J. (2003). Vocabulary tricks: Effects of instruction in morphology and context on fifth-grade students’ ability to derive and infer word meanings. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 447–494. doi:10.3102/00028312040002447
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bean, R. M., Zigmond, N., & Hartman, D. K. (1994). Adapted use of social studies textbooks in elementary classrooms views of classroom teachers. Remedial and Special Education, 15(4), 216–226. doi:10.1177/074193259401500403
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beck, I., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary development. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Berkeley, S., King-Sears, M. E., Hott, B. L., & Bradley-Black, K. (2012). Are history textbooks more “considerate” after 20 years? Journal of Special Education, 47, 217–230. doi:10.1177/0022466912436813
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. (2006). Reading next—A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report to the Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
   Google Scholar
• Boardman, A. G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C. S., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent struggling readers: A practice brief. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Corporation, Center on Instruction.
   Google Scholar
• Borsuk, E. R. (2010). Examination of an administrator-read vocabulary-matching measure as an indicator of science achievement. Assessment for Effective Intervention, 35, 168–177. doi:10.1177/1534508410372081
   Google Scholar
• Brigham, F. J., Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (1992). Teacher enthusiasm in learning disabilities classrooms: Effects on learning and behavior. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 7(2), 68–73.
   Google Scholar
• Bryant, D. P., Bryant, B. R., Flower, A., McKenna, J., Muething, C., Shin, M., & Kim, M. (2013). Secondary special education observation and intervention study: Technical report. Austin: Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin, and Texas Education Agency.
   Google Scholar
• Bulgren, J. A., Graner, P. S., & Deshler, D. D. (2013). Literacy challenges and opportunities for students with learning disabilities in social studies and history. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 28(1), 17–27. doi:10.1111/ldrp.12003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bulgren, J. A., Lenz, B. K., Marquis, J. G., Deshler, D. D., Schumaker, J. B., Davis, B., & Grossen, B. (2006). The instructional context of inclusive secondary general education classes: Teachers instructional roles and practices, curricular demands, and research-based practices and standards. Learning Disabilities, 4(1), 39–65.
   Google Scholar
• Carr, S. C., & Thompson, B. (1996). The effects of prior knowledge and schema activation strategies on the inferential reading comprehension of children with and without learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 19(1), 48–61. doi:10.2307/1511053
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavanaugh, B. (2013). Performance feedback and teachers, use of praise and opportunities to respond: A review of the literature. Education & Treatment of Children, 36(1), 111–136. doi:10.1353/etc.2013.0001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cawley, J., Hayden, S., Cade, E., & Baker-Kroczynski, S. (2002). Including students with disabilities into the general education science classroom. Exceptional Children, 68, 423–435. doi:10.1177/001440290206800401
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Change the Equation Organization. (2011). Feds grease the wheels for STEM education. Retrieved from http://changetheequation.org/blog/feds-grease-wheels-stem-education
   Google Scholar
• Common Core State Standards. (2010). National initiative. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/
   Google Scholar
• Cook, B. G. (2014). A call for examining replication and bias in special education research. Remedial and Special Education, 35, 233–246. doi:10.1177/0741932514528995
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cook, B. G., & Cook, S. C. (2013). Unraveling evidence-based practices in special education. Journal of Special Education, 47(2), 71–82. doi:10.1177/0022466911420877
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2009). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Cunningham, A. E., & Stanovich, K. E. (1997). Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later. Developmental Psychology, 33, 934–945. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.33.6.934
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• DeBoer, G. E. (2000). Scientific literacy: Another look at its historical and contemporary meanings and its relationship to science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 582–601. doi:10.1002/1098-2736(200008)37:6<582::aid-tea5>3.0.co;2-l
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dornisch, M., Sperling, R. A., & Zeruth, J. A. (2011). The effects of levels of elaboration on learners’ strategic processing of text. Instructional Science, 39(1), 1–26. doi:10.1007/s11251-009-9111-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–300. doi:10.3102/0034654308325998
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehren, B. J., Lenz, B. K., & Deshler, D. D. (2004). Enhancing literacy proficiency with adolescents and young adults. In C. A. Stone, E. R. Silliman, B. J. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.), Handbook of language and literacy development and disorders (pp. 681–701). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
   Google Scholar
• Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading in middle school. International Journal of Science Education, 28, 491–520. doi:10.1080/09500690500339092
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flynn, R. J., Marquis, R. A., Paquet, M. P., Peeke, L. M., & Aubry, T. D. (2012). Effects of individual direct-instruction tutoring on foster children’s academic skills: A randomized trial. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1183–1189. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.01.036
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gajria, M., Jitendra, A. K., Sood, S., & Sacks, G. (2007). Improving comprehension of expository text in students with learning disabilities: A research synthesis. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 40, 210–225. doi:10.1177/00222194070400030301
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gelzheiser, L. M., & Meyers, J. (1991). Reading instruction by classroom, remedial, and resource room teachers. Journal of Special Education, 24, 512–526. doi:10.1177/002246699102400409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gersten, R., Baker, S. K., Smith-Johnson, J., Dimino, J., & Peterson, A. (2006). Eyes on the prize: Teaching complex historical content to middle school students with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72, 264–280. doi:10.1177/001440290607200301
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gersten, R., Fuchs, L. S., Williams, J. P., & Baker, S. (2001). Teaching reading comprehension strategies to students with learning disabilities: A review of research. Review of Educational Research, 71, 279–320. doi:10.3102/00346543071002279
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gwet, K. (2001). Handbook of inter-rater reliability: How to estimate the level of agreement between two or multiple raters. Gaithersburg, MD: STATAXIS.
   Google Scholar
• Hairrell, A., Simmons, D., Swanson, E., Edmonds, M., Vaughn, S., & Rupley, W. H. (2011). Translating vocabulary research to social studies instruction: Before, during, and after text-reading strategies. Intervention in School and Clinic, 46, 204–210. doi:10.1177/1053451210389606
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hall, L. A. (2005). Teachers and content area reading: Attitudes, beliefs, and change. Teaching and Teacher Education, 21, 403–414. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2005.01.009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harry, B., Sturges, K. M., & Klingner, J. K. (2005). Mapping the process: An exemplar of process and challenge in grounded theory analysis. Educational Researcher, 34(2), 3–13. doi:10.3102/0013189x034002003
   Google Scholar
• Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C. L. (2007). Literacy instruction in the content areas: Getting to the core of middle and high school improvement. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
   Google Scholar
• Kaldenberg, E. R., Watt, S. J., & Therrien, W. J. (2015). Reading instruction in science for students with learning disabilities: A meta-analysis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 38, 160–173. doi:10.1177/0731948714550204
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kamil, M. L., Borman, G. D., Dole, J., Kral, C. C., Salinger, T., & Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide (NCEE 2008–4027). Retrieved from the Institute of Education Sciences website: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
   Google Scholar
• LeCompte, M. D., & Schensul, J. J. (1999). Designing and conducting ethnographic research. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, C. D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New York.
   Google Scholar
• Mason, L. H., & Hedin, L. R. (2011). Reading science text: Challenges for students with learning disabilities and considerations for teachers. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 214–222. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00342.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mastropieri, M. A., & Scruggs, T. E. (1994). Text versus hands-on science curriculum implications for students with disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15(2), 72–85. doi:10.1177/074193259401500203
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McCrudden, M., Schraw, G., Hartley, K., & Kenneth, A. K. (2004). The influence of presentation, organization, and example context on text learning. Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 289–306. doi:10.3200/jexe.72.4.289-306
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moin, L. J., Magiera, K., & Zigmond, N. (2009). Instructional activities and group work in the US inclusive high school co-taught science class. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7, 677–697. doi:10.1007/s10763-008-9133-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Nation’s report card. A first look: 2013 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/subject/publications/main2013/
   Google Scholar
• National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards: Application to students with disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/
   Google Scholar
• National Research Council. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• Ness, M. K. (2009). Reading comprehension strategies in secondary content area classrooms: Teacher use of and attitudes towards reading comprehension instruction. Reading Horizons, 49(2), 143–166.
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, S. B., Kaefer, T., & Pinkham, A. (2014). Building background knowledge. The Reading Teacher, 68, 145–148. doi:10.1002/trtr.1314
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newman, L. (2006). Facts from NLTS2: General education participation and academic performance of students with learning disabilities. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from www.nlts2.org/fact_sheets/nlts2_fact_sheet_2006_07.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Next Generation Science Standards. (2013). Get to know the Standards. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/get-to-know
   Google Scholar
• No Child Left Behind. (2002). No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Pub. L. No. 107–110. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/landing.jhtml
   Google Scholar
• Norris, S. P., & Phillips, L. M. (2003). How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education, 87(2), 224–240. doi:10.1002/sce.10066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Sullivan, P. J., Ysseldyke, J. E., Christenson, S. L., & Thurlow, M. L. (1990). Mildly handicapped elementary students’ opportunity to learn during reading instruction in mainstream and special education settings. Reading Research Quarterly, 25, 131–146. doi:10.2307/747598
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Organisation for Economic Co-operation, & Development. (2003). The PISA 2003 assessment framework—mathematics, reading, science and problem solving: Knowledge and skills. Paris, France.
   Google Scholar
• Parmar, R. S., Deluca, C. B., & Janczak, T. M. (1994). Investigations into the relationship between science and language abilities of students with mild disabilities. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 117–126. doi:10.1177/074193259401500207
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Recht, D., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effects of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 16–20. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.80.1.16
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reed, D. K., & Kershaw-Herrera, S. (2015). An examination of text complexity as characterized by readability and cohesion. Journal of Experimental Education, 84, 75–97. doi:10.1080/00220973.2014.963214
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reeves, C. R., Robertson, J., & Taylor, S. S. (2011). Addressing the need for special education teachers: The impact of online instruction on preservice teachers’ attitudes toward inclusion. Teacher Education and Practice, 24, 187–200.
   Google Scholar
• Sáenz, L. M., & Fuchs, L. S. (2002). Examining the reading difficulty of secondary students with learning disabilities expository versus narrative text. Remedial and Special Education, 23(1), 31–41. doi:10.1177/074193250202300105
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scruggs, T. E., & Mastropieri, M. A. (2007). Science learning in special education: The case for constructed versus instructed learning. Exceptionality, 15, 57–74. doi:10.1080/09362830701294144
   Google Scholar
• Scruggs, T. E., Mastropieri, M. A., & Bakken, J. P. (1993). Reading versus doing: The relative effects of textbook-based and inquiry-oriented approaches to science learning in special education classrooms. Journal of Special Education, 27, 1–15. doi:10.1177/002246699302700101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seifert, K., & Espin, C. (2012). Improving reading of science text for secondary students with learning disabilities effects of text reading, vocabulary learning, and combined approaches to instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly, 35, 236–247. doi:10.1177/0731948712444275
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-area literacy. Harvard Educational Review, 78, 40–59. doi:10.17763/haer.78.1.v62444321p602101
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepard, T., & Adjogah, S. (1994). Science performance of students with learning disabilities on language-based measures. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 9, 219–225.
   Google Scholar
• Snow, C. E., & Moje, E. B. (2010). What is adolescent literacy? Why is everyone talking about it now. Phi Delta Kappan, 91(6), 66–69. doi:10.1177/003172171009100616
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solis, M., Miciak, J., Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J. M. (2014). Why intensive interventions matter longitudinal studies of adolescents with reading disabilities and poor reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 37(4), 218–229. doi:10.1177/0731948714528806
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stahl, S. A., & Nagy, W. E. (2006). Teaching word meanings. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
   Google Scholar
• Sutherland, K. S., & Wehby, J. H. (2001). Exploring the relationship between increased opportunities to respond to academic requests and the academic and behavioral outcomes of students with EBD: A review. Remedial and Special Education, 22, 113–121. doi:10.1177/074193250102200205
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swanson, E. A. (2008). Observing reading instruction for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis. Learning Disability Quarterly, 31, 115–133.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swanson, E., Wanzek, J., McCulley, L., Stillman, S., Vaughn, S., Simmons, D., … Hairrell, A. (2015). Literacy and text reading in middle and high school social studies and English language arts classrooms. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 32, 199–222. doi:10.1080/10573569.2014.910718
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swanson, H. L., & Deshler, D. (2003). Instructing adolescents with learning disabilities: Converting a meta-analysis to practice. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 36, 124–135. doi:10.1177/002221940303600205
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Therrien, W. J., Hughes, C., & Hand, B. (2011). Introduction to special issue on science education and students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 186–187. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00339.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tishman, S., & Perkins, D. (1997). The language of thinking. Phi Delta Kappan, 78, 368–374.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Department of Education. (2011). National report on the condition of education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2011/2011033.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C. S., & Roberts, G. (2012). Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading and mathematics. A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
   Google Scholar
• Villanueva, M. G., & Hand, B. (2011). Science for all: Engaging students with special needs in and about science. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26, 233–240. doi:10.1111/j.1540-5826.2011.00344.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagner, R. C., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., & Pearson, N. A. (2010). Test of Silent Reading Efficiency and Comprehension. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
   Google Scholar
• Wexler, J., Reed, D. K., Pyle, N., Mitchell, M., & Barton, E. E. (2015). A synthesis of peer mediated academic interventions for secondary struggling learners. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 48, 451–470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolcott, H. F. (1994). Transforming qualitative data: Description, analysis, interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Yore, L. D., Craig, M. T., & Maguire, T. O. (1998). Index of science reading awareness: An interactive-constructive model, test verification, and grades 4–8 results. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 27–51. doi:10.1002/(sici)1098-2736(199801)35:1<27::aid-tea3>3.3.co;2-n
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zygouris-Coe, V. (2012). Disciplinary literacy and the Common Core State Standards. Topics in Language Disorders, 32(1), 35–50. doi:10.1097/tld.0b013e31824561a2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar